![]() |
|
Mary's Mosaic: Entering Peter Janney's World of Fantasy - Printable Version +- Deep Politics Forum (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora) +-- Forum: Deep Politics Forum (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/forum-1.html) +--- Forum: JFK Assassination (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/forum-3.html) +--- Thread: Mary's Mosaic: Entering Peter Janney's World of Fantasy (/thread-9490.html) |
Mary's Mosaic: Entering Peter Janney's World of Fantasy - Albert Doyle - 22-09-2012 I'm more interested in Mitchell and his story rather than Janney's sloppy approach towards Mitchell. If Mitchell is as deep as they say he should have interesting stories to tell. Especially if he has told them before as Damore suggested. Mary's Mosaic: Entering Peter Janney's World of Fantasy - Jim DiEugenio - 22-09-2012 Oh, you mean the meetings and the phone calls between the two of which there are no recordings, no notes, no photos, no descriptions and no nothing. Even though they would have represented a very large contract for Damore. Oh yes, that should really be something. Mary's Mosaic: Entering Peter Janney's World of Fantasy - Albert Doyle - 23-09-2012 Which is good reason to ask Mitchell isn't it? Mary's Mosaic: Entering Peter Janney's World of Fantasy - Jim DiEugenio - 27-09-2012 Ask him why he never met with Damore? Mary's Mosaic: Entering Peter Janney's World of Fantasy - Albert Doyle - 04-11-2013 Now that I've actually read Janney I find Jim's criticisms somewhat lacking. There's much more to this than Lisa's criticisms allowed. If you do the math, even with Janney's addition errors, he's still within the correct numbers to preclude Crump's being the man in the bushes. This is a bizarre case and I admit there were points in the book where Janney had my Fetzer bullshit meter pegging, however he still has supporting converging evidence that backs his claims. There's no doubt Wistar Janney was faking lack of knowledge of Mary's murder. I'm afraid I have to go with Janney on all counts in regard to the suspicious activities involved with the finding out about the murder and false stories about trying to find the diary. It seems Janney has a good circumstantial case that the Truitts were like the Paines in their supportive complicity with Angleton and Bradlee. It just doesn't seem likely that with Mary's antipathy and fear of Angleton's CIA connection to JFK's murder that she would appoint Angleton to be her book burner. Janney's right, all said and done 1) It isn't likely that known diarist Mary Meyer would not have a separate diary for her deepest thoughts. A diary witnessed by (I think it was) Toni Bradlee as being a known entity she knew Mary always kept on the bookshelf. 2) Angleton's concern with Scott's dangerous papers and Mary's diary fit an exact modus operandi. I think Leary is credible in this instance. If you backtrack from Mary's known LSD experiment group you have credible reason to believe Leary's story is true. Anne Chamberlin shut her mouth probably because Damore was driven to suicide. There are people like Ken Noland and the Truitts that could corroborate this LSD stuff but probably kept their mouths shut after people starting dropping dead like Mary. I'm afraid the peripheral evidence Lisa omits strongly backs Janney. Mary's Mosaic: Entering Peter Janney's World of Fantasy - Peter Lemkin - 04-11-2013 I also find Janney's book credible and I believe it pushes the case of the death of MPM where it belongs - as a part of the cover-up of JFK's murder. It brings forth some new names and POI...such as Joe Shimon, to name but one. I think there is MUCH TOO MUCH 'there' in the book to throw it out because of, perhaps, a few flaws. The case against Crump is totally demolished and the case for 'the usual gang' being behind this murder is convincing. IMHO. Mary's Mosaic: Entering Peter Janney's World of Fantasy - Albert Doyle - 06-11-2013 William L Mitchell's evasive quietness speaks more than words in my opinion. Crack that guy and you'll find out Janney is on the right track. Mitchell lied about working at the CIA cover safe-house Georgetown University, he listed a known CIA safe-house as his residence, and he lied to friends about the alleged scholarship he received in order to go overseas right after their set-up of Crump failed and people might have asked questions why Mitchell was so interested in fingering Crump. I mean CIA paid for that trip, right? How could Janney's critics ignore that? Look at the bigger picture here. Peter Janney just openly accused an emeritus college professor of being the CIA assassin of Mary Pinchot Meyer in public, in writing, in a book. Mitchell's and the media's response? Nothing. What pattern does that fit? Would a high-profile professor let a slander like that go unanswered? How does this contrast with Mitchell's original pro-active coming forward and serving as witness? Mitchell did disappear and never comment on this again. You would think he would at least have some public thoughts about it over 50 years, right? Something isn't right. Mary's Mosaic: Entering Peter Janney's World of Fantasy - Lauren Johnson - 14-11-2013 Mary's Mosaic: Entering Peter Janney's World of Fantasy - Albert Doyle - 18-11-2013 Leary's 'Flashbacks' about Mary Pinchot: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kNIkwDgzKuQ Mary's Mosaic: Entering Peter Janney's World of Fantasy - Tom Scully - 06-08-2015 Albert Doyle Wrote:No offense but I think you are switching the point from the current need to interrogate Mitchell to an argument over Janney's poor scholarship and methodology. You've won the contest over Janney's poor research and use of uncredible sources. However, as even Charles pointed out, that doesn't necessarily prove Mary Meyer wasn't covertly assassinated. And even if she was murdered by Crump for totally unrelated reasons, it doesn't preclude all this Janney theory business being used for deep political disinformation purposes. That's the trouble with a room full of mirrors is that it is hard to create just one straight image guided by straight logic. Too many words vs a simple solution Mr D. Simply knock on this Mr Mitchell's door and ask him. Otherwise Tom Scully is just an overly informational bringer of wrong information. Drew Phipps Wrote:So Albert, you admit posting on that other site under the name of "Ralph Yates"? Just curious why you would assume the moniker of an at least "partly-discredited-by-virtue-of-insanity" eyewitness to the Oswald double story. That strikes me as callous. Wasn't the use of the Ralph Yates name the topic of some other seemingly pointless post in the recent past? What are you up to? Quote:Last edited by the author on Jul 1, 2012 8:57:47 AM PDT Ralph Yates says: Quote:http://www.amazon.com/gp/customer-reviews/RHETJR89AG4KJ/ref=cm_cr_pr_rvw_ttl?ie=UTF8&ASIN=1616087080 Quote:Last edited by the author on Aug 16, 2014 2:45:27 PM PDT Ralph Yates says: Quote:September 5, 2014 http://memoryholeblog.com/2014/09/05/the-murder-of-mary-pinchot-meyer/ Quote:http://tomscully.com/node/12 ......... Will Any Apologies Follow After Mr. Doyle's Long Awaited, Reluctant Admission? |